Re: Am I paying for the same components in Delphi 2005 that I paid for in Delphi 1 and 2?

From: Allen Bauer (abauer_at_spicedham.borland.com)
Date: 10/25/04 

Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 09:03:33 -0700

> It is different, because the airbag is only a little feature. But when
> you join Win32 and .NET in the same IDE it is like you are assuming
> that everybody wants a 4x4, ignoring that many people want a Ferrari or
> a Smart.

That was only a single example to show a whole class of features. It was
not intended to be complete and all-inclusive.

> But the problem remains the same: the manufacturer "decides" what is
> better for you, and ignores that you prefer to administer your money in
> whatever you want. If you can buy a car without airbags, saving some
> money, then you can spend that money on other things.

The manufacturer usually decides based on competitive analysis and customer
feedback. Of course not everyone would want or need an airbag, but there is
certainly a significant portion of the money weilding public that values
those features to entice the manufacturer to modify their production
techniques to include these new features as standard. Also by making them
standard, the costs are actually reduced which translates into greater value
for the customer.

> Of course there is the problem that you mention: sometimes it is more
> expensive to remove a feature than to leave it, but that is a problem
> of the manufacturer; they should rethink their design process.

In an assembly line, having to make detours around certain assembly stations
(or even to simply pass through while the workers stand there idle) takes
time and thus costs money. Many times those delays or idle times actually
cost more than if that feature had been included.

By breaking out the products into SKUs (aka. Stock Keeping Unit), the
testing and manufacturing costs have increased. It also means greater
permutations that must be tested and regressed. If we can keep the actual
COGS (Cost of Goods Sold) the same or within a reasonable margin of the
previous version, *and* add significant customer value *and* not increase
the price... I'd say that's a huge win for all involved. Feel free to
disagree subjectively, however I don't think you could argue against this
strategy from a purely objective standpoint. 

-- 
Allen Bauer
Delphi/C#Builder Principal Architect
Borland Software Corporation.
http://blogs.borland.com/abauer